Kamala Harris for President

[Anonymous]

This is great!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know, I feel like this is a Hillary situation all over again

Nope, nothing like it. We have learned how to fight.

m

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully she's come up with something better than forcing teachers to stay until 6:00 pm daily to cut family childcare expenses

You think this is the purview of a president?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

"Plans?" Or, empty promises?

PP said she had no plans or policy prescriptions. if you don't like them or don't think they are realistic, fine. But she has given an indication of the direction her administration would take on these issues.

[Anonymous]

Harris can’t even be trusted to hold a real press conference and you’re voting for her? She has zero policy except what she’s stolen from Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

"Plans?" Or, empty promises?

PP said she had no plans or policy prescriptions. if you don't like them or don't think they are realistic, fine. But she has given an indication of the direction her administration would take on these issues.

She has given no policy platform, plans, or specifics.
Sorry. Stump speeches amount to empty promises without specifics.
Saying "I am going to focus on the middle class" means absolutely zilch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

"Plans?" Or, empty promises?

She has been in the office for over 3 1/2 years. Why has she not done any of those things while she has been in office if they are so important?
No, instead her administration hired a shitload more IRS agents to ensure that employees pay tax on their tips. And, there are ample laws against price fixing.... if this is what is happening, why hasn't she done anything yet? She still has 5 months. She could start working on that now. The voting acts you cite take elections away from states, where they constitutionally belong. They will never pass for that reason alone.

Face it.... this administration has done nothing when it comes to these things.
And, don't even get me started with their record on the border. It is deplorable.

1. She's currently Vice President. Not the President.
2. You're mad that the Biden administration hired more IRS agents? That had a net benefit of collecting $1billion. NOT from tips - from unpaid taxes from the uber-rich. How is this a bad thing? https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/07/11/millionaires-unpaid-taxes-irs/

Let me tell you something about your idiotic $1 Billion. It costs around $14 Billion to run the federal govt every day. So yor $1 Billion ran the govt for under 2 hours. Got it? BFD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully she's come up with something better than forcing teachers to stay until 6:00 pm daily to cut family childcare expenses

You think this is the purview of a president?

This was one of her ideas when she ran for president in 2020

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

Jeez....this is why liberals should not be in charge of our government. Socialism is not the way. Big government is not the way. If you don't like your income, choose a career that pays more. Lord help us.[b]

Let's be honest for a change. Trickle down never worked. It just made the rich richer and eviscerated the middle class. The massive tax cuts for billionaires and corporations is just welfare for the rich and has even created the deficit as we know it.

Another ignorant liberal who clearly doesn't do their own taxes or understand capitalism. [b]The Trump tax cuts lowered taxes for most Americans even with the $10K SALT deduction cap. Corporations don't pay taxes. They may write the checks to the IRS but you the consumer pay their taxes for them in the cost of the goods and services that you choose to buy freely. Increasing corporate taxes will be passed right along to you further exacerbating inflation. If you don't like your income, change your career to one that pays more and/or is in demand. Hate billionaires all you want but most of them have become billionaires as entrepreneurs creating businesses that employ thousands of taxpaying Americans and provide products and services people choose to buy. We need more risk-taking entrepreneurs, they deserve the benefits if they are successful because most fail.

Bolded is a flat out lie. Maybe it lowered your taxes, and the taxes of the 1% but certainly not "most Americans"

Nope. The Trump tax cuts lowered taxes for most Americans. You clearly don't do your own taxes. Stop parroting the liberal media and actually do some research. I would start with irs.gov and look at past tax brackets compared to current ones for various AGIs.

Let's say for the sake of argument that the taxes did go down for most Americans. Do you realize that the lowered taxes for us is sunsetting next year, while the tax breaks for corporations is not? So they gave you a temporary break, to push through a much larger tax cuts for corporations, that have been reporting record profits, even as the price of stuff has gone up.

Yes I'm aware they are sunsetting next year which is one of the reasons (among many) why I'm hoping we see a red wave and a Trump Presidency in November. What you don't seem to understand is that Corporations don't pay taxes. Sure, they write the checks to the IRS, but their customers (you who willingly buy their products without anyone forcing you) pay those taxes in the form of higher prices for their goods and services as well as less benefits and lower salaries for their employees. Instead of complaining about capitalism like every other liberal, make it work for you. Buy stock in these companies reporting record profits and get on the other side of the equation. Start small and build. Select low cost index funds that pay dividends and reinvest. Wash, rinse, repeat, and get rick "slowly" or quickly if you know what to look for. To paraphrase the quote, capitalism certainly has its flaws but it's so much better than the fantasy socialist utopia that Dems/Liberals desire but never happens in the real world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully she's come up with something better than forcing teachers to stay until 6:00 pm daily to cut family childcare expenses

Is that her responsibility if she was a president?

I'm not seeing that in the job description.

Oh how quickly we forget !. This was her plan when she ran in 2020, so yes I guess she felt it was in the job description

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully she's come up with something better than forcing teachers to stay until 6:00 pm daily to cut family childcare expenses

Harris herself was pushing that idea when she ran for president in 2020.

We have a problem here: Kamala is really stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

I have over $10M and I care. I created a successful IT business with my own and borrowed funds that now employs over 163 people. My skilled employees enjoy excellent salaries, healthcare benefits that my company pays over half the premiums for, 401K matching so they can eventually retire with a good next egg, business class travel, and other benefits. My company provides a service that is in demand. I took the risk....I should reap the reward.

We sound similar. Except we employ more people, and have net worth quite a bit north of $10M. We came here as poor immigrants, and have worked our tail off and utilized the resources offered by the country to get to where we are. Happy to pay back, once we get to $100M. We can't use up $100M in our lifetime.

I, too, would love to wait to pay taxes until I reach 100m net worth. Who wouldn’t? Unfortunately this is called greed. You can delude yourself however you want but the rest of us don’t have to indulge you.

Congratulations on your success, no doubt facilitated by a government and a middle class that supports you. Now you get to pay back! Not on your personal timetable.

I think you misunderstood. We're obviously fine with the tax structure, and have been paying in. We're fine with the ADDITIONAL taxes once we get to $100M. I think the Republicans have done a great job of selling the idea to the masses that the tax structure that places more tax burden on the extraordinarily wealthy is somehow unfair, because it could be them some day.

100 percent this.

Success should be rewarded, absolutely. We live in a capitalist country. But our government invests in things like infrastructure so telecommunications and transportation can happen. Businesses benefit disproportionately from those investments. Government educates the workforce so employers can hire people with a baseline of skills and knowledge. Government funds a state department so businesses can conduct commerce in other countries. Government develops standards so the physical plug for your EV will work in every car, for example. Businesses should be paying their fair share for the opportunities that government standardizes and wealthy individuals should be paying their fair share for the opportunities the USA has afforded them to become successful. That isn't authoritarian.

The problem with posts like this is that they treat businesses like people. Businesses don't pay taxes. Their employees and customers do.

The businesses should be paying taxes. That is the point.

No you missed the point. If you raise corporate taxes, business will just pass those increased taxes through to the price of their products and services and decrease employee benefits and pay. If you raise corporate taxes enough where they are no longer competitive in a global market, they will pick up and move somewhere else taking their jobs with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hehehe - Apparently Jill Stein or the Green party are going to be on the ballot in around 20 states.

https://www.jillstein2024ballotaccess.com/

Fair number of swing states too
I feel like she could be a spoiler for Harris especially in swing states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

"Plans?" Or, empty promises?

PP said she had no plans or policy prescriptions. if you don't like them or don't think they are realistic, fine. But she has given an indication of the direction her administration would take on these issues.

She has given no policy platform, plans, or specifics.
Sorry. Stump speeches amount to empty promises without specifics.
Saying "I am going to focus on the middle class" means absolutely zilch.

All candidates do this. It's analogous to running for class president and promising pizza every day for lunch and no dress code Fridays. It's absolutely not going to happen but it makes people feel good.
Politicians know that most voting Americans are at that grade school level mentally they don't ask hard questions but vote for who makes them feel good or who their clique is voting for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

"Plans?" Or, empty promises?

PP said she had no plans or policy prescriptions. if you don't like them or don't think they are realistic, fine. But she has given an indication of the direction her administration would take on these issues.

She has given no policy platform, plans, or specifics.
Sorry. Stump speeches amount to empty promises without specifics.
Saying "I am going to focus on the middle class" means absolutely zilch.

All candidates do this. It's analogous to running for class president and promising pizza every day for lunch and no dress code Fridays. It's absolutely not going to happen but it makes people feel good.
Politicians know that most voting Americans are at that grade school level mentally they don't ask hard questions but vote for who makes them feel good or who their clique is voting for.

I think personality matters more than we think to be an executive